IMDb RATING
6.0/10
1.7K
YOUR RATING
In 1900, in Egypt, archaeologist Mark Brandon is asked by Ann Mercedes to find the tomb of Ra-Hotep but their quest is marred by intrigue, betrayal, murder and danger.In 1900, in Egypt, archaeologist Mark Brandon is asked by Ann Mercedes to find the tomb of Ra-Hotep but their quest is marred by intrigue, betrayal, murder and danger.In 1900, in Egypt, archaeologist Mark Brandon is asked by Ann Mercedes to find the tomb of Ra-Hotep but their quest is marred by intrigue, betrayal, murder and danger.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Rushdy Abaza
- Robed Man
- (uncredited)
Leora Dana
- Lovely Girl
- (uncredited)
Frank DeKova
- Akmed Salah
- (uncredited)
Loutfi El Hakim
- Workman
- (uncredited)
Mahmoud El-Sabbaa
- Guide in Luxor
- (uncredited)
Tewfik Helmy
- Antique Dealer
- (uncredited)
David Leonard
- Claudius
- (uncredited)
Manuel Lopez
- Arab Chanter
- (uncredited)
Laurette Luez
- Native Girl
- (uncredited)
Sayed Mabrouk
- Tuareg Leader
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This Classic film from 1954 was created by MGM and lots of money was put into its production. The photography in Egypt and the many historic sites are outstanding and this was done mainly because Television had taken hold of many families and they were staying home and watching their TV Screens in 1954 instead of going to the movies. Robert Taylor, (Mark Brandon) was an archaeologist in Egypt and was a rough and tough man who loved adventure. Eleanor Parker,(Ann Barclay Mercedes) meets up with Mark in order to hire him to explore some ruins which will confirm that the Bible story about Joseph were true. There is plenty of romance and dangerous sand storms and plenty of riding on camels backs through out the desert and secret tombs and secret doors.
I really enjoyed looking at both actors. Robert Taylor with his piercing blue eyes and handsome profile. It was a real pleasure just to look at him. And Eleanor Parker is Eleanor - always beautiful, calm and elegant as ever.
The chemistry between Robert Taylor and Eleanor Parker was very good. I felt the characters themselves were well-portrayed.
The only let-down was the plot and the Director.
It started so well but you find that some situations did not make sense and you felt the direction of the film was everywhere and going nowhere. It didn't flow jumping from one place to another then started to lag half-way through the movie.
The budding romance between Robert Taylor and Eleanor Parker didn't make sense either. I mean if you were Eleanor's husband would you leave her constantly with Robert Taylor shouldn't the husband be more attentive. He was practically throwing them together and didn't seem too unhappy when her affections had changed direction. Such one dimensional character is almost too painful to watch.
It was then pretty obvious from the beginning who the villain would be but watching Philip Mercedes against Robert Taylor, well it was just too obvious.
It was such a shame considering this film had so much potential and who knows, with a better Director and stronger plot this could have turn into a box-office hit.
The chemistry between Robert Taylor and Eleanor Parker was very good. I felt the characters themselves were well-portrayed.
The only let-down was the plot and the Director.
It started so well but you find that some situations did not make sense and you felt the direction of the film was everywhere and going nowhere. It didn't flow jumping from one place to another then started to lag half-way through the movie.
The budding romance between Robert Taylor and Eleanor Parker didn't make sense either. I mean if you were Eleanor's husband would you leave her constantly with Robert Taylor shouldn't the husband be more attentive. He was practically throwing them together and didn't seem too unhappy when her affections had changed direction. Such one dimensional character is almost too painful to watch.
It was then pretty obvious from the beginning who the villain would be but watching Philip Mercedes against Robert Taylor, well it was just too obvious.
It was such a shame considering this film had so much potential and who knows, with a better Director and stronger plot this could have turn into a box-office hit.
I've given this film a 7 rating, which is much higher than most of the other IMDb participants who have expressed themselves. Frankly, I thoroughly enjoyed "Valley of the Kings." Its strong points definitely outweigh its shortcomings.
True, this is in a sense a very glossy and high budget version of a pulp adventure story. But the Egyptian locations and the color photography are worth watching. The acting, while not exceptional, is adequate; Taylor and Parker are especially appealing to the eye.
"Valley of the Kings" is an example of what Hollywood was trying to do (big names, wide screen, lush color photography, exotic location shooting, etc.) in the 50s to convince customers to turn off the TV and drive down to their neighborhood movie house. Do not expect to see a precursor to Indiana Jones. Taylor's character is no college professor who occasionally trades in his tweed coat for a leather jacket and bull-whip. He's a rough and tumble type who has picked up his archaeological knowledge while working on construction projects in Egypt.
Eleanor Parker is, as always, good to look at as the daughter of an Egyptologist who is determined to prove her father's hypothesis. The story is perhaps not exceptional, but it will hold your interest.
No one will mistake "Valley of the Kings" for "Lawrence of Arabia." But it is a solid entertainment that you will enjoy more than some of the overblown, hugely expensive productions that stumble out of Hollywood these days.
True, this is in a sense a very glossy and high budget version of a pulp adventure story. But the Egyptian locations and the color photography are worth watching. The acting, while not exceptional, is adequate; Taylor and Parker are especially appealing to the eye.
"Valley of the Kings" is an example of what Hollywood was trying to do (big names, wide screen, lush color photography, exotic location shooting, etc.) in the 50s to convince customers to turn off the TV and drive down to their neighborhood movie house. Do not expect to see a precursor to Indiana Jones. Taylor's character is no college professor who occasionally trades in his tweed coat for a leather jacket and bull-whip. He's a rough and tumble type who has picked up his archaeological knowledge while working on construction projects in Egypt.
Eleanor Parker is, as always, good to look at as the daughter of an Egyptologist who is determined to prove her father's hypothesis. The story is perhaps not exceptional, but it will hold your interest.
No one will mistake "Valley of the Kings" for "Lawrence of Arabia." But it is a solid entertainment that you will enjoy more than some of the overblown, hugely expensive productions that stumble out of Hollywood these days.
I first saw this film when it was released in the UK. I was thirteen at the time. It will always be a favourite because it sparked off what was to become one of my greatest passions: anything and everything to do with Ancient Egypt and its remarkable impact on the imagination, ambition and sometimes greed of every civilisation that succeeded it. Yep, Robert Taylor was perhaps out of place but Eleanor Parker made up for the weaknesses and foibles of the plot. It's just a good, old-fashioned romp.
Robert Taylor and Eleanor Parker make a handsome couple in this story about an archaeologist agreeing to search for holy relics in an Egyptian tomb, lured by the beautiful Parker. She's married to Carlos Thompson who goes along on the desert adventure and it's easy to guess what the outcome will be as the plot develops.
The story ingredients are promising, but the picture takes a long time to get to its most suspenseful moments, including a climactic fistfight between Taylor and Thompson at the top of ancient ruins that is artfully staged for maximum effect. Too bad more time wasn't spent developing the slow-paced script which hardly matches the effectiveness of the location photography in Egypt and the striking score by Miklos Rozsa.
Fans of Taylor and Parker will enjoy seeing them together, both at their physical peak and demonstrating some good chemistry as romantic leads. He's ruggedly convincing as the Alpha-male archaeologist but the story isn't up to the level of a similar yarn Metro did previously, "King Solomon's Mines." Summing up: A weak script is the real problem.
The story ingredients are promising, but the picture takes a long time to get to its most suspenseful moments, including a climactic fistfight between Taylor and Thompson at the top of ancient ruins that is artfully staged for maximum effect. Too bad more time wasn't spent developing the slow-paced script which hardly matches the effectiveness of the location photography in Egypt and the striking score by Miklos Rozsa.
Fans of Taylor and Parker will enjoy seeing them together, both at their physical peak and demonstrating some good chemistry as romantic leads. He's ruggedly convincing as the Alpha-male archaeologist but the story isn't up to the level of a similar yarn Metro did previously, "King Solomon's Mines." Summing up: A weak script is the real problem.
Did you know
- TriviaIt was possible to film in Egypt as it was before the pro-Soviet Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser seized power. After 1954 few Western films were made in Egypt due to the country's increasing ties with the Soviet Union and China.
- GoofsThe use of the word "corn" is not an anachronism. Corn was a common term for wheat in the Old World, centuries before Columbus. Native American maize was called "corn" by the Europeans because it was a familiar term for this new staple grain. Even today corn is used to refer to crops such as wheat and barley in British Common Wealth areas of the world. In America all of these would be referred to as "grain".
- Quotes
Mark Brandon: You know what they say: Egypt is like a man without a woman.
Ann Barclay Mercedes: Why do they say that?
Mark Brandon: Hot by day, cold by night.
- Crazy credits[Prologue] The earth holds few treasures which have stimulated man's imagination -- and his greed -- as much as the tombs of the rulers of ancient Egypt, the Pharaohs.
This is the story of the search for the most fabulous tomb of them all. It begins near Cairo in 1900 . . .
- ConnectionsReferenced in Twelve Chapters on Women (1954)
- How long is Valley of the Kings?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $2,065,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 26m(86 min)
- Aspect ratio
- 1.33 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content